Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37599460›Full record

ArticleHealth policy and planning2023

Using intersectionality to study gender and antimicrobial resistance in low- and middle-income countries.

Juliette M C Gautron, Giada Tu Thanh, Violet Barasa, Giovanna Voltolina

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health policy and planning, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Juliette M C GautronDepartment of Social Anthropology, University of Cambridge, Free School Lane, Cambridge, CB2 3RF, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5070-2252
Giada Tu ThanhIndependent Consultant, Gran de Gracia, Barcelona 08012, Spain.ORCID 0009-0001-0981-6888
Violet BarasaInstitute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Library Road, Brighton & Hove, BN1 9RE, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8004-4465
Giovanna VoltolinaItad, Preece House, Davigdor Road, Brighton & Hove, BN3 1RE, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4242-6566
Itad (United Kingdom) · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Sussex · GB

Funding

Department of Health and Social Care
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Different sexes and genders experience differentiated risks of acquiring infections, including drug-resistant infections, and of becoming ill. Different genders also have different health-seeking behaviours that shape their likelihood of having access to and appropriately using and administering antimicrobials. Consequently, they are distinctly affected by antimicrobial resistance (AMR). As such, it is crucial to incorporate perspectives on sex and gender in the study of both AMR and antimicrobial use in order to present a full picture of AMR's drivers and impact. An intersectional approach to understanding gender and AMR can display how gender and other components 'intersect' to shape the experiences of individuals and groups affected by AMR. However, there are insufficient data on the burden of AMR disaggregated by gender and other socio-economic characteristics, and where available, it is fragmented. For example, to date, the best estimate of the global burden of bacterial AMR published in The Lancet does not consider gender or other social stratifiers in its analysis. To address this evidence gap, we undertook a scoping review to examine how sex and gender compounded by other axes of marginalization influence one's vulnerability and exposure to AMR as well as one's access to and use of antimicrobials. We undertook a gendered analysis of AMR, using intersectionality as a concept to help us understand the multiple and overlapping ways in which different people experience exposure vulnerability to AMR. This approach is crucial in informing a more nuanced view of the burden and drivers of AMR. The intersectional gender lens should be taken into account in AMR surveillance, antimicrobial stewardship, infection prevention and control and public and professional awareness efforts, both donor and government funded, as well as national and international policies and programmes tackling AMR such as through national action plans.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsDeveloping CountriesDrug Resistance, BacterialDrug Resistance, MicrobialFemaleHumansMaleSex FactorsSocioeconomic FactorsAnti-Bacterial Agentsaccessdeveloping countriesequitygenderhealth carehealth inequalitieshealth system researchrational drug usesocial determinantsSocial epidemiology

Identifiers

PMID37599460
PMCPMC10566319
OpenAlexW4386019183

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.